The Fable of Ali’s(RA) Birth inside Ka’aba: An Honour or Dishonour?


The Fable of Ali’s(RA) Birth inside Ka’aba: An Honour or Dishonour?

In The Name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful!

We have divided this article into following sections:

(I) – Introduction

(II) – The fictitious story of birth inside Ka’aba dishonors Ali(RA)

(III) – The fictitious story of Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba dishonours Mary – Maryam(as) and degrades her status.

(IV) – Verification of Shia narrations about Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba.

(V) – Is there Mutawatir(numerous) Evidence that Ali was Born in the Ka’aba?

(VI) – Scholars who rejected the fable of Ali(RA) taking birth inside Ka’bah.

(VII) – As per the other view Ali(ra) was born in Shu’ab bani hashim.

(VIII) – Who was actually born in the Ka’aba?

(IX) – Other Myths related to the Fictitious Fable of Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba.

(X) – Answers to common references cited by Shiites.

(XI) – The anticipated accusation of Nasibism for shattering the Fictitious Fable about Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba.

 

(I) – Introduction

It is a well known fact between the people of knowledge that, the (Ghali)extremist Shia narrators used to steal the narrations regarding merits of different Sahaba of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) and would attribute those to Ali(ra). In this process they fabricated thousands of reports regarding virtues and merits of Ali(ra).

Al-Hafidh Abu Yala al-Khaleeli said: “Rawafidh fabricated 300,000 narrations about Ali and Ahlel-bayt“. [ “Al manar wa munif fi saheeh wa dhaif”, page 292]

We see when going through Shia narrations that the merits of the different companions of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) have been instead attributed to Ali(ra). Narrations like, “I am the great Siddeeq,” or “I am the great Farooq.” Furthermore, in narrations of conquests, we also find that whenever an enemy of Islam is killed, we often read after the inclusion of the name of the person that killed him, we find: “it was also said that Ali may have killed him.”

Perhaps the most surprising is a quote by Ibn Taymiyyah in Minhaj Al-Sunnah where he says, “A trustworthy person from our peers met up with a sheikh I know, who was religious and an ascetic but within him was some Tashayyu(shi’ism). He claimed that he had a book of secrets that he took from one of the treasuries of the caliphs and praised the book. He then brought it, and it was in a good handwriting, and within it are the narrations in praise of Abu Bakr and Omar in Saheeh Al-Bukhari and Muslim, but those narrations were attributed to Ali.”

With this in mind, it is not all too strange to find this story of birth in the Ka’aba, being attributed to Ali, because this story was regarding Hakeem bin Hizam’s birth inside Ka’aba, We read in Sahih Muslim: Hakeem bin Hizam was born inside the Ka’bah and lived for one hundred and twenty years.[Sahih Muslim #1532]. For if Hakeem bin Hizam’s story was a fabrication, it would have been attributed to a more famous Sahabi, like Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman, Mu’awiyah, or Amr bin Al-Aas. It simply does not make sense to attribute narrations of merits to companions that are relatively unpopular in comparison to Ali.

The birth of Ali(ra) inside Ka’aba was a fictitious story, fabricated with the purpose of showing the high status and merit of Ali(ra). But those who fabricated this fictitious story failed to realize that they were actually dishonoring Ali(ra) with this fabrication and also degrading the status of another Prophet of Allah – Isa ibn Maryam(AS) also known as Jesus(AS) and his mother Maryam(AS).

We believe that, the honourable status of Ali(ra) is not dependent on these fabricated and baseless stories. In the view of Sunnis, the status of Ali(ra) is very high and it will be the same, regardless of the place of his birth.

In regards to the presence of this baseless story in Sunni books, then the first person to have made this claim was Al-Hakim (d. 405 AH), who is a respectable Sunni scholar with Shia tendencies, as anyone who has read through his Mustadrak would have noticed. Strangely, Al-Hakim did not provide any evidence for this claim, nor did he report any narrations from the Prophet (salalahu alaihi wa salam), Ali, any companion, any of the Tabi’een, or any early historian, to support this view. With the absence of this evidence, we have no choice but to reject this statement as a slip of the pen. Most of the other Sunni scholars or sources which are usually quoted by the Shi’ee propagandists are secondary sources which copied the view of Al-Hakim, their primary source was Al-Hakim’s claim, so the ruling on these would be the same as that on the claim of Al-Hakim, and these are to be discarded.

It can also be argued that, the Quraysh during the days of ignorance(jahiliyya) desanctified the House of Allah(Ka’aba) by placing the idols around it, making tawah in a naked state around it, and allowing woman to give birth in it. But when Islam came there, it put an end to all these practices of the days of ignorance. And this is the reason we don’t find any son or daughter of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) taking birth inside Ka’aba, even though his wife Khadija(ra) is one of the best woman and one of their daughter Fatima(ra) was also one of the best woman. Neither did Fatima(ra) who is the mistress of the ladies of paradise[who is superior to the mother of Ali] did not give birth to Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) inside Ka’aba.

 

(II) – The fictitious story of birth inside Ka’aba dishonors Ali(RA)

(i). It is an agreed upon fact that, until the conquest of Makkah, several idols were present inside Ka’aba which were worshipped by people.

Narrated Ibn `Abbas: When Allah’s Messenger(SAWS) arrived in Mecca, he refused to enter the Ka`ba while there were idols in it. So he ordered that they be taken out. The pictures of the (Prophets) Abraham and Ishmael, holding arrows of divination in their hands, were carried out. The Prophet (SAWS) said, “May Allah ruin them (i.e. the infidels) for they knew very well that they (i.e. Abraham and Ishmael) never drew lots by these (divination arrows). Then the Prophet (SAWS) entered the Ka`ba and said. “Allahu Akbar” in all its directions and came out and not offer any prayer therein.[Sahih al-Bukhari #4288]

As per Quran, the idols that are worshiped besides Allah are Rijs(impure/unclean) , we read:

Thalika waman yuAAaththim hurumati Allahi fahuwa khayrun lahu AAinda rabbihi waohillat lakumu al-anAAamu illa ma yutla AAalaykum faijtaniboo alrrijsa mina al-awthani waijtaniboo qawla alzzoori

That (shall be so); and whoever respects the sacred ordinances of Allah, it is better for him with his Lord; and the cattle are made lawful for you, except that which is recited to you, therefore avoid the uncleanness of the idols and avoid false words. (Quran 22:30).

Therefore, the Ka’aba was despoiled with the idols, before the conquest of Makkah. This fact is even affirmed by famous Shia Tafseer(commentary) of Quran.

Shia Tafseer states:

[Tahhira (to purify) implies that a house for the worship of Allah already existed there before Ibrahim, which like the Ka’aba in the times of the Holy Prophet, was despoiled with idols. It was in ruins. Ibrahim rebuilt it. As verse 127 of this surah suggests, after purification, the place was reserved for worship of Allah only.] (Tafseer Pooya/Ali, for verse 2:125)

The meaning of Sanctification, itself means that the place should be free of idols as per another Shia Tafseer.

Shia Tafseer, “The Light of The Holy Qur’an” states:

[Then, it refers to the covenant that He made with Abraham (a.s.) and Ismail (a.s.) about the purification of the Ka’bah, where it says:{“… And We enjoined Abraham and Ismail (saying) : ‘ Sanctify My House for those who go around it, for those who abide in it and pay devotion, and to those who bow down and prostrate themselves ‘.”}

What is the meaning of sanctification here? Some have said that the meaning of sanctification here is purification from the existence of idols. Some others have said that the purpose is purification from outward dirt like blood and the contents of animals’ stomachs which people sacrificed therein, because there were some ignorant persons who thoughtlessly did such deeds as leaving these remains behind.] (The Light of The Holy Qur’an  by Ayatullah Sayyid Kamal Faghih Imani and A Group of Muslim Scholars, under explanation of verse 2:125) [Screen shot]

Therefore, even the Shia Tafseer(commentary) attested to the fact that, sanctification implies purification from the existence of idols, because as we read in Quran(22:30) that idols are rijs(impure). But unfortunately the existence of idols was present inside Ka’aba before the conquest of Makkah, which implies that it was not sanctified from the rijs(impurity) of idols. This was the reason Prophet Mohammad refused to enter Ka’aba after the conquest, until the idols were taken out from it[Refer Sahih al-Bukhari #4288].

Hence, the fictitious story about Ali(ra) being born inside Ka’aba actually dishonors Ali(ra) for being born at a place which was not sanctified, there was the rijs(impurity) of idols there, and the place which Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) refused to enter until sanctified from the existence of idols.

On the top of that we read in Shia book that Ali(ra) was born in “prostration” at a place which is known to be surrounded by idols.

`Ali was born within the Ka’bah with his eyes closed and his body in humble prostration before the Almighty. Fatimah stayed in the Ka’bah for three days and as the fourth day approached she stepped out, carrying her gem in her arms. [A Brief History of the Fourteen Infallible, by World Organization for Islamic Services (Board of Writing, Translation and Publication) Tehran – IRAN.]

Al-Bahooti al-Hanbali(rah) said:

It is makrooh to pray facing towards a set-up image, as was stated, because it is similar to the kuffaar’s prostrating to them (images). … In al-Fusool it says: It is makrooh to pray facing a wall on which there are pictures and images, because that is similar to the worship of idols and statues. [Kashshaaf al-Qinaa‘, 1/370]

(ii). There were pictures present inside Ka’aba and we know from prophetic traditions that angels of mercy and blessings do not enter a house in which there are pictures. We read:

Narrated Ibn `Abbas: The Prophet (SAWS) entered the Ka`ba and found in it the pictures of (Prophet) Abraham and Mary. On that he said’ “What is the matter with them ( i.e. Quraish)? They have already heard that angels do not enter a house in which there are pictures; yet this is the picture of Abraham. And why is he depicted as practicing divination by arrows?”[ Sahih al-Bukhari #3351]

Narrated Abu Talha: The Prophet (SAWS) said, “Angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog or there are pictures.” [Sahih al-Bukhari #5949].

Al-Nawawi(rah) said:  With regard to these angels who do not enter a house in which there is a dog or an image, they are the angels who go round with mercy, blessings and prayers for forgiveness. With regard to the recording angels, they enter every house and never leave the sons of Adam under any circumstances, because they are enjoined to list and record their deeds. [Sharh Muslim, 14/84]

Al-Suyooti(rah) said:  Al-Khattaabi said: What is meant is the angels who bring mercy and blessings, not the recording angels. [Sharh al-Nasaa’i, 1/141]

This fictitious Fable dishonors Ali(ra) for being born at a place which was vacant from the angels of mercy and blessings.

 

(III) – The fictitious story of Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba dishonours Mary – Maryam(as) and degrades her status.

We find in Shia traditions regarding the fable of Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba, that how Maryam(AS)[Mary] is dishonored and her status is degraded.

In the infamous Shia book Peshawar Nights, we read:

Sa’sa’a said to Ali: “Who is superior, you or Jesus?” Ali said: “I am superior, for when Mary became pregnant by the Grace of Allah, and the time of her delivery approached, a revelation was granted to her: Leave this holy House for this is a House for prayers, not a place for the delivery of children.’ Accordingly, she left the holy House and went to the wilderness where she gave birth to Jesus. But when my mother, Fatima Bint-e-Asad, felt labor pains within the precincts of the holy Ka’ba, she clung to the wall and prayed to Allah in the name of that House and the builder of that House, to lessen her pain. Soon a fissure appeared in the wall, and my mother heard a mysterious voice telling her, “O Fatima! Enter the House of the Ka’ba.’ She went in, and I was born inside of the holy Ka’ba.” [Source: Peshawar Nights, Page 137138].

Similarly, Shia Allama al-Hilli quotes “the author of Basha’ir al-Mustafa” as recording the following hadith in Shia book:

Yazid ibn Qa`nab says: I saw the wall of Ka`bah was opened and Fatimah went inside it and the wall returned to its former state. The group of people who were sitting there rose up to unlock the door but it was not opened. We inferred that the wall had been opened on the order of the Lord and that it was a favor God had done to that lady and her son. Three days passed and on the fourth day, Fatimah carrying the new-born infant in her hands came out of Ka`bah, saying: Beyond doubt, I am superior to the believing women of former times, for Asiyah, the daughter of Muzahim, worshipped God secretly and God did not like to be worshipped except under necessity that is in Pharaoh’s house which was the cradle of atheism and oppression. Mary, the daughter of `Imran, too came out of the mosque of Jerusalem and her place of worship on the order of Lord and then gave birth to Jesus (a.s) eating fresh date from a dry palm-tree. However, I entered Ka`bah on the order of Lord and fed on heavenly fruits. After delivery too when I intended to come out of Ka`bah, an invisible caller told me to name the auspicious infant `Ali, for Allah the most High says: I name him after My own name, reared him with special rearing, making him aware of My own profound knowledge. It is he who, in a near future, will clean My house from idols, will break them, and will declare the rule of one God on the roof of My house. He will glorify Me. Happy is one who loves him and obeys his orders and ill-fated is one who is hostile to him and disobeys his orders. (Basha’ir al-Mustafa, page 8).

We find in these fictionalized stories that Maryam(as) who was the best woman of her time as per Quran, was ordered to leave  Bayt al-Maqdis because it was a place of worship and thus she went under the palm tree and gave birth to Isa(as). However, Ali’s(ra) mother Fatima bint Asad, was ordered to go into the Ka’aba and give birth to Ali(ra). This is a clear dishonor of Maryam(as) and even degradation of her high status.

In the Shia tradition we even read that the mother of Ali(ra) – Fatima bint Asad claimed to be superior to the believing women of former times including Maryam(as). But the fact is that the status of Fatima bint Asad is no where closer to the status of Maryam(as), as her superiority over women was attested in Quran. In the light of explicit verse of the Quran Maryam (as) is superior to all the women. We read:

وَإِذْ قَالَتِ الْمَلَائِكَةُ يَا مَرْيَمُ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ اصْطَفَاكِ وَطَهَّرَكِ وَاصْطَفَاكِ عَلَىٰ نِسَاءِ الْعَالَمِينَ
And [mention] when the angels said, “O Mary, indeed Allah has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of the worlds. [Quran 3:42].

Similarly, we read in Prophetic Hadeeth:

Narrated ibn Abbas that Prophet (SAWS) said: “Ladies of women in paradise after Maryam bintul Imran are: Fatima bintul Muhammad, Khadija bintul Khuwaylid, then Asiyah bintul Muzahim woman of pharaoh”. [“al-Awsat” (#1107); Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani said hadith is hasan in “Fath al-Bari” (7/168)].

So, there is no mention of Fatima bint Asad in the list of best woman mentioned in any authentic tradition, where as the fabricated Shia tradition degrades the status of Maryam(as) by claiming Fatima bint Asad superior to the believing women of former times.

 

(IV) – Verification of Shia narrations about Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba.

Before we start the verification we would like to inform the readers about an interesting fact – The famous classical Shia scholar al-Kulayni –the author of Al-Kafi, never mentioned the birth in the ka`bah for Ali(ra) in his chapter about the History of Imam Ali. Al-Kulayni usually gives an introduction of the person, the year they were born, etc, and then mentions hadith. However, Al-Kulayni did not mention anything about the birth of Ali(ra) inside Ka’aba. This shows that even Kulayni did not trust in this fictitious fable.

This fable was reported in Shi’ee books with extremely weak chains having Ghulat(exaggerators) Shia narrators in them or the narrations have incomplete chain or are chain-less. Even the text of those narrations suffers from multiple problems, proving these to be fabricated narrations without any shred of doubt.

Narration #1:

Shia Allama al-Hilli quotes “the author of Basha’ir al-Mustafa” as recording the following hadith:

عَن يزِيدَ بنِ قُعنُبٍ قَالَ: كُنتُ جَالِساً مَع العَبَّاسِ بنِ عَبدِالمُطَّلبِ وَفريقٍ مِن بَني عَبدِالعُزّى بإزَاءِ بَيتِ اللهِ الحَرامِ إذْ أقبَلَتْ فَاطِمَةُ بِنتُ أسدٍ أُمُّ أَمِيرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ عَلَيْهِ السّلامُ، وَكانَتْ حَاملاً بهِ لِتِسعَةِ أشهُرٍ وَقدْ أخَذها الطَّلَقُ. فَقالَت: يَا رَبِّي إنِّي مُؤمنَةٌ بِكَ وَبِما جاءَ مِن عِندكَ مِن رُسُلٍ وَكُتُبٍ، وإنّي مُصدِّقَةٌ بِكَلامِ جَدِّي إبْرَاهيمَ الخَليلِ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ وإنَّه بَنى بَيتَكَ العَتيقَ، فَبحَقِّ الَّذي بَنَى هَذَا البَيْتَ وَبِحَقِّ الْمَولُودِ الَّذي فِي بَطْنِي إِلاَّ مَا يَسَّرْتَ عَلَيَّ وِلاَدَتِي.

قَالَ يَزيدُ بنُ قعنب: فَرأَيتُ البَيتَ قَد انشَقَّ عَن ظَهرِهِ وَدَخَلتْ فَاطمَةُ فِيهِ وَغابَتْ عَنْ أبصَارِنا وَعادَ البَيتُ إلَى حَالهِ. فَرُمْنا أنْ يَنفَتحَ لَنا قُفلُ البَابِ فَلَمْ يَنفَتِحْ. فَعَلمْنا أنَّ ذلكَ مِنْ أمْرِ اللهِ تَعالَى. ثُمَّ خَرَجَتْ فِي اليَوْمِ الرَّابِعِ وَعَلَى يَدِها أمِيرُ المُؤمنينَ عَلِيُّ بنُ أبِي طَالبٍ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ فَقالَتْ: قَدْ فُضِّلْتُ عَلى مَنْ تَقدَّمَنِي مِن النِّساءِ، لأنَّ آسيةَ بنتَ مُزاحِمٍ عَبدَتِ اللهَ سِرَّاً فِي مَوضِعٍ لاَ يُحبُّ اللهُ أنْ يُعبدَ فيهِ إلاَّ اضْطِراراً.
Yazid ibn Qa`nab: I and `Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib and a group of the tribe of `Abd al-`Uzza were sitting near Ka`bah when we saw Fatimah Bint Asad, the mother of Amir al-Mu’minin while she was nine months pregnant and signs of delivery were manifest in her, came from afar raising her hands in prayer and saying: O Lord! I believe in You, Your Messengers and their books while accepting as truth the words of the prophet Ibrahim (a.s) who rebuilt this house. O Lord! I ask You through the one who built this house and the one I have in my womb to make the hardship of his birth easy for me.

Yazid ibn Qa`nab says: I saw the wall of Ka`bah was opened and Fatimah went inside it and the wall returned to its former state. The group of people who were sitting there rose up to unlock the door but it was not opened. We inferred that the wall had been opened on the order of the Lord and that it was a favour, God had done to that lady and her son. Three days passed and on the fourth day, Fatimah carrying the new-born infant in her hands came out of Ka`bah, saying: Beyond doubt, I am superior to the believing women of former times, for Asiyah, the daughter of Muzahim, worshipped God secretly and God did not like to be worshipped except under necessity that is in Pharaoh’s house which was the cradle of atheism and oppression. Mary, the daughter of `Imran, too came out of the mosque of Jerusalem and her place of worship on the order of Lord and then gave birth to Jesus (a.s) eating fresh date from a dry palm-tree. However, I entered Ka`bah on the order of Lord and fed on heavenly fruits. After delivery too when I intended to come out of Ka`bah, an invisible caller told me to name the auspicious infant `Ali, for Allah the most High says: I name him after My own name, reared him with special rearing, making him aware of My own profound knowledge. It is he who, in a near future, will clean My house from idols, will break them, and will declare the rule of one God on the roof of My house. He will glorify Me. Happy is one who loves him and obeys his orders and ill-fated is one who is hostile to him and disobeys his orders. (Source: Basha’ir al-Mustafa, page 8).

Verification of the Isnad(chain of narrators) –

This story was taken from al-Sadooq’s `ilal al-Sharaa’i and Ma`aani al-Akhbaar (same chain is used in Basha’ir al-Mustafa), and this is the most famous narration that is repeated by Shia speakers in their majaalis. This narration is extremely weak and was reported from narrators who were accused of ghulu(exaggeration).

Here is that narration with its chain(isnad) from ilal al-Sharaa’i and Ma`aani al-Akhbaar (same chain is used in Bashaarah al-Mustafa)

حدثنا علي بن أحمد بن محمد الدقاق رحمه الله قال : حدثنا محمد بن جعفر الأسدي قال : حدثني موسى بن عمران النخعي عن الحسين بن يزيد عن محمد بن سنان عن المفضل بن عمر عن ثابت بن دينار عن سعيد بن جبير قال : قال يزيد ابن قعنب كنت جالسا مع العباس بن عبد المطلب وفريق من عبد العزى بإزاء البيت الحرام إذ أقبلت فاطمة بنت أسد أم أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام وكانت حاملة به تسعة أشهر وقد أخذها الطلق فقالت رب انى مؤمنة بك وبما جاء من عندك من رسل وكتب وانى مصدقة بكلام جدي إبراهيم الخليل عليه السلام وانه بني البيت العتيق فبحق الذي بني هذا البيت وبحق المولود الذي في بطني لما يسرت علي ولادتي قال يزيد بن قعنب فرأينا البيت وقد انفتح عن ظهره ودخلت فاطمة وغابت عن أبصارنا والتزق الحائط فرمنا ان ينفتح لنا قفل الباب فلم ينفتح فعلمنا ان ذلك أمر من الله تعالى ثم خرجت بعد الرابع وبيدها أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ثم قالت انى فضلت على من تقدمني من النساء لان آسية بنت مزاحم عبدت الله سرا في موضع لا يحب ان يعبد الله فيه إلا اضطرارا وان مريم بنت عمران هزت النخلة اليابسة بيدها حتى اكلت منها رطبا جنيا وانى دخلت بيت الله الحرام وأكلت من ثمار الجنة

– al-Sadooq’s, `Ilal al-Sharaa’i, vol. 1, pg. 136

– al-Sadooq’s, Ma`aani al-Akhbaar, pg. 62

 Problems with the chain: 

1.) The person who is an eye-witness account of this story is Yazeed bin Qa`nab, who doesn’t seem to be in mentioned in the Shi’i books of Rijaal (See: al-Shahrudi, Mustadarakaat `ilm al-Rijaal vol. 8, pg. 258), nor is he ever mentioned in any Sunni Rijaal book. Essentially Yazeed bin Qa`nab came out of nowhere to narrate this one hadith about the birth of Ali(ra) in the Ka`bah, and was never seen or heard from again. Not to mention Sa`eed bin Jubayr was a Tabi’i born in the year 45AH and died 96AH, so it is impossible that Sa`eed bin Jubayr heard this directly from Yazeed bin Qa`nab. Since this story is relating what had happened during the birth of Ali, making this story take place 10 years before revelation, and 23 years before hijrah. And if people say it was al-`Abbas bin `Abd al-Mutallib who narrated this story as well, then they are incorrect since it was Yazeed narrating the story and saying he was sitting with al-`Abbas), and even if it is considered for argument’s sake then, this is impossible as well since al-`Abbas died in the year 32 AH, 13 years before the birth of Sa`eed bin Jubayr.

2.) al-Mufaddal bin `Umar – has been accused of ghuluw(exaggeration)

3.) Muhammad bin Sinaan – is from the ghulat(exaggerators).

4.) al-Hussayn bin Yazid – He is al-Nawfali, and the Qummis accused him of becoming ghuluww at the end of his life, but al-Najashi says that he doesn’t agree with that based off of his narrations. He is still majhool(anonymous) nonetheless.

5.) Musa bin `Imran al-Nakah’i – he is majhool(anonymous)

6.) `Ali bin Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Daqqaq – he is majhool(anonymous) according to al-Khoei.

Therefore, as per Shia hadeeth standards, the chain of this narration is terribly  weak and unreliable, as it is filled with narrators who were either anonymous – who could possibly be liars – and there is a disconnection in the chain and it has narrators who were accused of Ghuluw(exaggeration) – the ghulat(exaggerators) were infamous for fabricating reports in merits of Ali(ra).

Verification of the Matn(text of narration) –

In the Shia tradition we even read that the mother of Ali(ra) – Fatima bint Asad claimed to be superior to the believing women of former times. But the fact is that, as per authentic traditions of Prophet(SAWS) the status of Fatima bint Asad is no where closer to the status of those women with whom she compared herself. We read in Prophetic Hadeeth:

Narrated ibn Abbas that Prophet (SAWS) said: “Ladies of women in paradise after Maryam bintul Imran are: Fatima bintul Muhammad, Khadija bintul Khuwaylid, then Asiyah bintul Muzahim woman of pharaoh”. [“al-Awsat” (#1107); Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani said hadith is hasan in “Fath al-Bari” (7/168)].

There is no mention of Fatima bint Asad in the list of best woman mentioned in any authentic tradition, where as in the fabricated Shia tradition Fatima bint Asad claimed superiority over all the women of former times. What needs to be pondered as well is that, if giving birth inside Ka’aba would make a women superior to believing women of former times, then why didn’t the Mother of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) – Aminah bint Wahb – attain this honor? This kind of miracle could have  helped Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) in his propagation of Islam among the Makkans.

Therefore, even the text(matn) of this report proves it to be a fabrication of some intellectual weak heretics.

Hence, in the light of above mentioned facts this narration is an outright fabrication, which can never be used as evidence and needs to be discarded.

 

Narration #2:

انه انفتح البيت من ظهره ودخلت فاطمة فيه ثم عادت الفتحة والتصقت وبقيت فيه ثلاثة أيام فأكلت من ثمار الجنة فلما خرجت قال علي عليه السلام : السلام عليك يا أبه ورحمة الله وبركاته ، ثم تنحنح وقال : ( بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم قد أفلح المؤمنون ) الآيات

(Ibn Shahr Ashoob, Manaaqib, vol. 2, pg. 23)

Here is another narration that mentions the birth in the Ka`bah but without a complete chain of narrators, and says after Fatimah bint Asad brought Imam Ali out of the Ka`bah, then Imam Ali as an infant says Salaam and then recites the beginning verses of Surah al-Mu’minoon. (See: Ibn Shahr Ashoob, Manaaqib, vol. 2, pg. 23).

For more details on this story, refer the book of Mulla Baqir Majlisi, Jila ul ayoon vol 1, pages 272 ; 273 ; 274 ; 275 (Urdu version).

Similarly we read in Shia book:

`Ali was born within the Ka’bah with his eyes closed and his body in humble prostration before the Almighty. Fatimah stayed in the Ka’bah for three days and as the fourth day approached she stepped out, carrying her gem in her arms. To her great surprise, she found the Holy Prophet waiting to receive the newly-born child in his anxious arms. Imamate feeling the subtle touch of prophethood, Ali opened his eyes and saluted the Divine Prophet: “Asalamu alayka ya Rasula’llah” (Peace be on you, O Messenger of Allah). [A Brief History of the Fourteen Infallible, by World Organization for Islamic Services (Board of Writing, Translation and Publication) Tehran – IRAN.]

Verification of Chain and Text:

The chain of this Shia narration is incomplete which qualifies it to be rejected out rightly, because without a proper chain one cannot verify whether it is true or false, as anyone can fabricate a lie and attribute to someone.

As for the text of this narration, then the issue with it is that, the Quranic verses of Surah al-Mu’minoon were revealed many years later after the Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) declared his Prophethood. So the question which arises is that, how did Ali(ra) come to know about these verses of Quran before Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) was granted Prophethood and before he started receiving the Wahi(revelation) ?. Did Ali(ra) receive Wahi prior to Prophet Mohammad(SAWS) ? Also in the similar tradition we cited above from Shia book, we find that Ali(ra) calling Mohammad(SAWS) as Rasul Allah(Messenger of Allah) – a time when even Prophet(SAWS) didn’t know that he was going to be a Messenger of Allah.

The next problem with the text of these reports is that, Ali(ra) spoke being a baby, however as per authentic report of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS), there were only four babies who spoke.

The Prophet (SAWS) said, “None spoke in cradle but three: (The first was) Jesus, (the second was), there a man from Bani Israel called Juraij. While he was offering his prayers, his mother came and called him. He said (to himself), ‘Shall I answer her or keep on praying?” (He went on praying) and did not answer her, his mother said, “O Allah! Do not let him die till he sees the faces of prostitutes.” So while he was in his hermitage, a lady came and sought to seduce him, but he refused. So she went to a shepherd and presented herself to him to commit illegal sexual intercourse with her and then later she gave birth to a child and claimed that it belonged to Juraij. The people, therefore, came to him and dismantled his hermitage and expelled him out of it and abused him. Juraij performed the ablution and offered prayer, and then came to the child and said, ‘O child! Who is your father?’ The child replied, ‘The shepherd.’ (After hearing this) the people said, ‘We shall rebuild your hermitage of gold,’ but he said, ‘No, of nothing but mud.'(The third was the hero of the following story) A lady from Bani Israel was nursing her child at her breast when a handsome rider passed by her. She said, ‘O Allah ! Make my child like him.’ On that the child left her breast, and facing the rider said, ‘O Allah! Do not make me like him.’ The child then started to suck her breast again. (Abu Huraira further said, “As if I were now looking at the Prophet (SAWS) sucking his finger (in way of demonstration.”) After a while the people passed by, with a lady slave and she (i.e. the child’s mother) said, ‘O Allah! Do not make my child like this (slave girl)!, On that the child left her breast and said, ‘O Allah! Make me like her.’ When she asked why, the child replied, ‘The rider is one of the tyrants while this slave girl is falsely accused of theft and illegal sexual intercourse.”[ Sahih al-Bukhari #3436]

Ibn ‘Abbaas stated: Four people spoke while they were babies: ‘Eesaa the son of Maryam(as), Jurayj’s companion, Yusuf’s witness and Phir’aon’s daughter’s hairdresser.

Some scholars combined between this Hadeeth and the one collected by al-Bukhari by saying the first Hadeeth only mentions those who spoke while they were actually in the cradle. So this fourth baby spoke, however he was not in a cradle and this is how some of the people of knowledge combined between these two Ahaadeeth. The conclusion being that according to the authentic Ahaadeeth; four babies spoke, but only three while in the cradle and Allaah knows best]. For more information please refer this {link}.

Hence, in the light of above mentioned facts this narration is an outright fabrication, which can never be used as evidence and needs to be discarded.

 

Narration #3:

We read in infamous Shia book , ‘Peshawar Nights’:

Sa’sa’a said to Ali: “Let me know who is superior, you or Adam.” The Holy Imam said: “It is not proper for a man to praise himself, but according to the maxim: ‘Declare the blessings that Allah has given you,’ I tell you that I am superior to Adam.” When asked why this was so, Ali explained that Adam had every means of mercy, comfort, and blessings for him in paradise. He was asked simply to abstain from the forbidden food. But he could not restrain himself, and he ate from the tree. As a result, he was expelled from paradise. Allah did not forbid him, Ali, from eating wheat (which, according to Muslim belief was the forbidden ‘tree’). But since he had no inclination towards this temporal world, he voluntarily refrained from eating wheat. (The point of Ali’s remark was that excellence of a man before Allah lies in piety and devotion, and that the height of piety lies in abstaining even from what is permissible.)
Sa’sa’a asked: “Who is superior, you or Noah?” Ali replied: “I am superior. Noah called his men to worship Allah, but they did not obey. Their shameful mistreatment was torture to him. He cursed them and invoked Allah: ‘O my Lord! Leave not on the earth a single person of the unjust ones.’ After the death of the Prophet, even though the people caused me extreme difficulty, I never cursed them. I suffered their torment with patience.”
Sa’sa’a asked: “Who is superior, you or Abraham?” Ali replied: “I am superior, for Abraham said: ‘My Lord! Show me how Thou Givest life to the dead.’ He said: ‘What! do you not believe?’ He said: ‘Yes, but that my heart may be at ease.’ (2:260) My faith was such that I said: ‘If the veil over the unseen were lifted, my faith would not increase.”
Sa’as’a asked: “Who is superior, you or Moses?” The Holy Imam replied: “I am superior, for when Almighty Allah ordered Moses to go to Egypt to invite Pharaoh to the truth, Moses said: ‘My Lord! Surely I killed one of them, so I am afraid that they will slay me. And my brother Aaron, he is more eloquent of tongue than I. Therefore send him with me as an aide, to help me. Surely I fear that they will reject me.” (28:33-34) The Holy Prophet ordered me, by the command of Allah, to go to Mecca and to recite the verses of the Chapter ‘Al-Bara’a’ from the top of the Ka’ba to the Quraish infidels. I was not afraid, even though there were few people there who had not lost a near relative by my sword. Obeying his order, I performed my duty alone. I recited the verses of ‘Al-Bara’a’ and returned.”
Sa’sa’a asked: “Who is superior, you or Jesus?” Ali said: “I am superior, for when Mary became pregnant by the Grace of Allah, and the time of her delivery approached, a revelation was granted to her: ‘Leave this holy House for this is a House for prayers, not a place for the delivery of children.’ Accordingly, she left the holy House and went to the wilderness where she gave birth to Jesus. But when my mother, Fatima Bint-e-Asad, felt labor pains within the precincts of the holy Ka’ba, she clung to the wall and prayed to Allah in the name of that House and the builder of that House, to lessen her pain. Soon a fissure appeared in the wall, and my mother heard a mysterious voice telling her, “O Fatima! Enter the House of the Ka’ba.’ She went in, and I was born inside of the holy Ka’ba.”. [Source: Peshawar Nights, Page 137138].

Verification of Chain and Text:

The Shia author[Sultan u’l-Wa’izin Shirazi], did not provide any source or chain for this report in his book, and a chain-less report is like a body without a head, which needs to be discarded.

As for the text, then it has multiple problems:

(i). According to the fictionalized text, Ali(ra) is claiming superiority over almost all the Prophets, and in a way is maligning some of the mentioned Prophets vis-a-vis his own behaviour. Of course any introductory student of ‘knowledge would see that this is a huge fabrication.

(ii). Quran mentions about the birth of Jesus(as), but it nowhere hints that Allah(swt) ordered Maryam(as) to leave the mosque of Jerusalem as that place was not ment for delivery of children, rather she did that from herself, because when she found out that she was pregnant, she was astonished because she had never been touched by a man. This obviously upset Maryam(as) greatly and to avoid any embarrassment she withdrew from her family and the public’s eye and went to a place east of Jerusalem.

We read in Quran:

And mention, [O Muhammad], in the Book [the story of] Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place toward the east. And she took, in seclusion from them, a screen. Then We sent to her Our Angel, and he represented himself to her as a well-proportioned man. She said, “Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, [so leave me], if you should be fearing of Allah .” He said, “I am only the messenger of your Lord to give you [news of] a pure boy.” She said, “How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?” He said, “Thus [it will be]; your Lord says, ‘It is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter [already] decreed.’ “So she conceived him, and she withdrew with him to a remote place. And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm tree. She said, “Oh, I wish I had died before this and was in oblivion, forgotten.” But he called her from below her, “Do not grieve; your Lord has provided beneath you a stream. And shake toward you the trunk of the palm tree; it will drop upon you ripe, fresh dates. “(Quran 19: 16-25).

(iii). Birth in the Temple is no major feat and many people were born in the Temple. So this tradition that was cited in Peshawar Nights is an outright lie for yet another reason. Here is an excerpt from [Faiths of Man: A Cyclopaedia of Religions by JGR Forlong, page 235].

(iv). The other point to ponder over is that, as per the fabricated Shia tradition Maryam(as) was commanded by Allah to leave the sanctified house of Allah, where as mother of Ali(ra) – Fatima bint Asad – was ordered by Allah(swt) to enter Ka’aba, where in several idols were kept. And this supposed miracle didn’t occur with the mother of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS).

(v). Miracles are of two types: Prophetic (Mu’ajazzat) and Pious (Karamaat).

Mu’ajazzat usually occurs to give authenticity to the Prophet and help the followers of that Prophet. If we understand the fissure in the wall of Ka’aba was to do with Ali(ra) then it cannot be mu’ajazzat.

As for Karamaat then these occur to pious in times of great need usually to save the ‘pious’ from death. Other than this karamaat are also included on the acts of great insight that the pious have experienced, such as on battlefields. In the case of this story there was no such reason for this miracle to occur. Why a hole needed to be blown in to the ka’bah simply so for a sahabi to be born or his mother (RA) to be kept in private is not typical of other karamaat.

Why would Allah blast open the wall! Why the miracle was required in the first place, and the whole incident is against the principals of Miracles Allah have showed us in Quran and through His Messengers(AS).

Hence, in the light of above mentioned facts this narration is an outright fabrication, which can never be used as evidence and needs to be discarded.

 

(V) – Is there Mutawatir(numerous) Evidence that Ali was Born in the Ka’aba?

As we mentioned in the beginning that, the first person to have made this claim was Al-Hakim (d. 405 AH), who is a respectable Sunni scholar with Shia tendencies, as anyone who has read through his Mustadrak would have noticed. Ibn al-Jawzî stated: “Al-Hâkim was Shi’ee-leaning (mutashayyi`) and this is a flagrant trait of his. [al-Muntazam (8:269)].

Al-Hakim said:

«تواترت الأخبار بأن فاطمة ولدت عليا في جوف الكعبة» (المستدرك3/482)

It has come from mutawatir(numerous) narrations that fatima bint asad gave birth to Ali in ka’aba”.[Mustadrak al-Hakim3/482].

Reply 1:

Al-Shareef Hatim bin Arif Al-Awni(A faculty member at the University of Umm Al-Qura) explained the statement of Al-Hakim.

Shareef Hatim al-Awni stated:

أما قول الحاكم : ” فقد تواترت الأخبار: أن فاطمة بنت أسد ولدت أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب كرم الله وجهه في جوف الكعبة “، فـ(المتواتر) عند الحاكم ليس هو المتواتر عند الأصوليين ، والذي يعنون به الخبر الذي يفيد العلم اليقيني الضروري لكثرة المخبرين به . كما نبّه على ذلك البلقيني في محاسن الاصطلاح (453) ، والعراقي في التقييد والإيضاح (1/776) .

فلا يتجاوز كلام الحاكم أن يكون إخبارًا عن أن هذا الأمر في زمنه كان من الأمور المشهورة بين الناس ، ولا يدل على أكثر من ذلك ؛ لما بيّنّاه من أن المتواتر عنده ليس هو المتواتر عند الأصوليين .

وإذا تبيّنَ ذلك : فإن مجرّد الشهرة في زمن الحاكم المتوفَّى سنة (405هـ) ، لا تُغني شيئًا ؛ خاصةً إذا خالفت مقالةً لمن هو أقرب زمنًا منه من زمن الحادثة التي اشتهرت في زمنه ، وهو مصعب الزبيري المتوفَّى سنة (236هـ) ، وهو علّامةٌ في نسب قريشٍ وأخبارها ، حيث نفى أن يكون أحدٌ قد وُلد في جوف الكعبة غير حكيم بن حزامٍ كما سبق .

أما سبب شهرة هذا الأمر في زمن الحاكم : فهو لأنه مما تدّعيه الشيعةُ لعلي رضي الله عنه ، وهو عندهم يكاد يكون من المسلّمات ، دون أن يكون لديهم برهانٌ صحيحٌ عليه . حتى قال شاعرهم (وهو السيد الحميري ، كما في ديوانه 64:) عن فاطمة بنت أسد أمِّ علي بن أبي طالب (رضي الله عنه) :

ولدتْهُ في حرم الإله وأمنـِه    والبيتِ حيثُ فناؤه والمسجدُ

بيضاءُ طاهرةُ الثيابِ كريمةٌ   طابت وطاب وليدُها والمولدُ

وتناقلت ذلك المصادرُ الشيعيةُ ، كأمالي الشيخ الصدوق وأمالي الطوسي وغيرها .

وفي الإمام الحاكم تشيّعٌ يسير ، نص عليه أهل العلم . فلعل مصدره هو شهرة هذا الخبر في زمنه بين عموم الناس ، والناس أخذوها من الشيعة ومن مثل هذه الأخبار غير المعتمدة ”

As for the saying of Hakim “Narrative s are Mutawatir that Fatimah bint Asad gave birth to Amir al-Mumineen Ali karramAllah wajhahu inside the Kaabah” then know that Mutawatir according to Hakim doesn’t mean Mutawatir as per the terminology of Usulis who consider that Mutawatir is that which gives certainty in absolute knowledge because of abundance of the narrators as it was pointed out by Al-Bulqini in Mahasin Istilah (p.453) and al-Iraqi in at-Taqyeed wa al-Idah (1/776)

So the statement of Hakim doesn’t indicates more than this, that it was famous among the contemporaries of Hakim. It doesn’t mean more than that as we have pointed out that Mutawatir according to Hakim doesn’t mean Mutawatir according to Usulis.

When it is clear then know that the mere fame during the time of Hakim (405 AH) doesn’t mean anything especially when it opposes the opinion of him who existed at a time closer to the incident than it. He was Mus’ab b. Abdullah (235AH) a specialist in genealogy of quraish. He denied that any one was born inside Kaabah except Hakeem b. Hizaam as it has passed.

As for the reason for which it became famous during the era of Hakim then it is due to what shia claim for Ali and it is is agreed upon among them without having any reliable evidence. A poet said…. Then he mentioned a poem of Himyari…

The shia sources like Amaali of Sadooq and Amaali of Tusi are keeping it alive in their books. It could be that the source of this story is the fame of the incident among common public and people took it from shia. [Source].

Reply 2:

Al-Hakim did not provide any evidence for this claim, nor did he report any narrations from the Prophet(SAWS), Ali, any companion, any of the Tabi’een, or any early historian, to support this view. With the absence of this evidence, we have no choice but to reject this statement as a slip of the pen.

Regarding this statement of Imam al-Hakim, Imam Suyuti recorded the view of Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani that:

و ما وقع فی مستدرک الحاکم من ان علیا ً ولد فیھا ضعیف۔ ﴿تدریب الراوی ص۳۵٦﴾

As for what is in Mustadrak Al Hakim that Ali was born in it, then it is daeef(weak/unreliable). [Tadreeb al-Rawi, page 356]

It’s worthy to be noted that, Al-Hakim not only called such a baseless and fabricated story Mutawattir(numerous) in his book but in the same book, he made many mistakes in it and also authenticated several fabricated and false reports, which implies that his rulings or views are not credible in this book.

Ibn Hajar in “Lisan al Meezan” stated regarding Al-Hakim:

ولكنه يصحح في مستدركه أحاديث ساقطة فيكثر من ذلك فما أدري هل خفيت عليه فما هو ممن يجهل ذلك وإن علم فهو خيانة عظيمة
“But he authenticated in his “Mustadrak” narrations which are worthy to be dropped. He did so a lot. I don’t know, was he unaware of them (the narrations). He is not one to be ignorant of them. If he was aware of them, then this would be a big treachery”.[ Lisan al Meezan]

However, scholars did mention the reason of Al-Hakim’s blunders. Imam Sakhawi in Fath Mugheeth stated: Al-Hakim out of negligence declared several fabricated reports as authentic…the reason behind this was that he compiled Mustadrak in the last part of his life, which made an impact on his memory too, due to which he became negligent and He wasn’t able to re-examine and verify. (Fath Mugheeth, vol 1, page 49).

Imam Suyuti stated: The reason behind Al-Hakim’s negligence is that, though he compiled the book(Mustadrak) but he died before revising it. This means, he wasn’t able to re-read and rectify the mistakes in it.

The other reason was Al-Hakim’s lenience, which means he used to be lenient with grading a hadith in his book, he would authenticate a report which wasn’t authentic.[Al-Taqreeb, page 26).

We read in Kitab al-Asma’ wa’s-Sifat:

Al-Hâkim’s Mustadrak was criticized by the hadîth scholars due to the number of mistakes and inaccuracies found in it. Al-Sakhâwî in al-I`lân wal-Tawbîkh and others mention that he declares many forged reports to be rigorously authentic not to mention weak ones, instead of clinging to his own expressed precondition that only reports with chains of the rank of al-Bukhârî’s and Muslim’s would be retained. For example, he narrates in the Mustadrak from Ibn `Abbâs that Allâh revealed to the Prophet(saw): I have killed seventy thousand [in punishment] for [the murder of] Yahyâ ibn Zakariyya and I will kill seventy thousand times seventy thousand [in punishment] for [the murder of] your daughter’s son al-Husayn. Al-Hâkim said this report has a sound chain while al-Dhahabî added: “By the criterion of Muslim” but Ibn Hibbân said this hadîth is untraceable (lâ asla lahu), al-Dhahabî himself rejected its matn as munkar in the Siyar while Ibn Kathir similarly declared it “highly anomalous” (gharîb jiddan) in al-Bidâya. [See Ibn Hibbân, al-Majrûhîn (2:215), al-Khatîb, Târîkh Baghdâd (1:142), al-Hâkim (1990 ed 2:319, 2:648, and 3:195), Fayd al-Qadîr (1:205), Tadhkirat al-Huffâz (1:77 gharîb), Mîzân (sv. Qâsim ibn Ibrâhîm al-Hâshimî), and Siyar (Risâla ed 4:342-343).] Al-Dhahabî went to excess in regretting that al-Hâkim had compiled the Mustadrak in the first place. He said:”It would have been better if al-Hâkim had never compiled it”! As mentioned by Dr. Bashshar `Awwad Ma`rûf in his doctoral thesis al-Dhahabî wa Manhajuhu fî Kitâbihi Târîkh al-Islâm. However, The Hadith expert Nur al-din Itr pointed out that Al-Hakim compiled in his old age, intending to revise it, a task left unfinished beyond the first volume. [al-Sakhâwî, Fath al-Mughîth (1:36) and Mamdûh, Raf` al-Minâra (p. 153 n. 1)]

[Source: Kitab al-Asma’ wa’s-Sifat vol 4, page 25, by Al Bayhaqi, Translation and Notes by Dr. Gibril Fouad Haddad].

Therefore, the rulings and views of Al-Hakim are not credible in his book Mustadrak.

One cannot provide any narration to support this claim from Sunni sources, even Al-Hakim himself, an early Hadithist failed. It is therefore unlikely to suggest that this narration is Mutawatir(numerous), let alone Saheeh. The other Sunni scholars or sources which are usually quoted by the Shi’ee propagandists are secondary sources which copied the view of Al-Hakim again, their primary source was Al-Hakim’s claim, so the ruling on them would be the same as that on the claim of Al-Hakim; those are to be discarded.

Clarification of an Argument:

Some Shia propagandists argue that, a rule of Hadeeth Science is that if a hadeeth is mutawatir, then weakness of chain does not harm it. Even if it is considered to be Weak; it does not mean fabricated. They even argue that, in relation to virtues(fadhail) even daif(weak) narrations are accepted.

Response:

Firstly, As Sheikh Shareef Hatim al-Awni clarified that, the statement of Hakim doesn’t indicate more than this, that it was famous among the contemporaries of Hakim. Mutawatir according to Hakim doesn’t mean Mutawatir according to Usulis. Secondly, even if for argument’s sake we leave the meaning of Mutawattir according to Al-Hakim, even then the ignorant Shiites who raise these arguments have no idea about Hadeeth Science, they read some statements here and there, and without gaining proper idea about these  rules and their conditions, they start misapplying these rules at places where these are inapplicable. The fact, is that these rules cited by the Shiites have certain conditions with which the baseless claim of Al-Hakim doesn’t meet. Hence these rules can never be applied in this case. There is no evidence for the story of Ali(ra) being born in Ka’aba to be Mutawattir. There isn’t even a single authentic chain for this story, let alone the presence of multiple chains. Hence, the Shi’ee argument falls flat. Thirdly, as for the claim that weak hadeeths are acceptable in virtues(fadhail), then again, this story is not even a hadeeth, An important part of a hadeeth is Isnad(chain of narrators), however Al-Hakim did not present any chain from either the Prophet(saw), or Ali, or any companion, or any of the Tabi’een, or any early historian, to support this view. Al-Hakim just made a baseless claim, he didn’t provide any chains for this claim. It’s truly a baseless story, so in no way could the rules of hadeeth be applied on this baseless fable. Moreover, when the scholars cited the claim of Al-Hakim and then weakened it, they were weakening the statement of Al-Hakim, not a hadeeth. Therefore, in no way could the rules of Hadeeth science be applied in this scenario.

 

(VI) – Scholars who rejected the fable of Ali(RA) taking birth inside Ka’bah.

(1). Mus’ab bin Abdullah(rah).

Mus’ab bin Abdullah stated after mentioning that Hakeem bin Hizam(ra) was born in Ka’aba:

ولم يولد قبله ولا بعده في الكعبة احد۔(المستدرک للحاکم: ج 3، ص 236، وسندہ صحیح)

And neither anyone was born inside Ka’aba before him(Hakeem bin Hizam) nor after him. [Mustadrak al Hakim]

Note: Al-Hakim criticized the view of Mus’ab bin Abdullah in his book, that “no one else was born in Ka’aba except Hakeem bin Hizam”, and then Al-Hakim claimed that Ali(ra) was born in Ka’aba, however, the claim of Hakim was weakened and rejected by several scholars, such Imam Ibn Hajar and others. This supports the view of Mus’ab bin Abdullah that no one else was born inside Ka’aba except Hakeem bin Hizam. Also, it must be noted that Mus’ab bin Abdullah was a second century scholar and an expert of lineages.

(2). Imam Nawawi(rah).

واما ماروي ان علي بن ابي طالب رضي الله عنه ولد فيها فضعيف عند العلماء۔(تہذیب الاسماء واللغات للنووی:ج1 ص149)

Imam Nawawi stated: As far as the birth of Ali(ra) inside Ka’aba, then this is weak in the view of Scholars. (Tahdhib al-Asma’ wa al-Lughat, vol 1 page 149).

(3). Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani(rah).

قال الزبير بن بكار : كان مولد حكيم في جوف الكعبة .

قال شيخ الإسلام : ولا يعرف ذلك لغيره ، وما وقع في مستدرك الحاكم من أن عليا ولد فيها ضعيف .

Al Zubayr ibn Bakkar said: The birth of the Sahabi Hakeem ibn Hizam took place in the Ka’aba.  Shaikh Al Islam[Ibn Hajar] said: It was not known for anyone else (that he was born in the Ka’aba). As for what is in Mustadrak Al Hakim that Ali was born in it, then it is weak. [Tadreeb al-Rawi, page 356]

(4). Imam Suyuti(rah) recorded the statement of Ibn Hajar, showing his approval with the view of  Ibn Hajar.

و ما وقع فی مستدرک الحاکم من ان علیا ً ولد فیھا ضعیف۔ ﴿تدریب الراوی ص۳۵٦

As for what is in Mustadrak Al Hakim that Ali was born in it, then it is daeef(weak/unreliable). [Tadreeb al-Rawi, page 356].

(5). Muhibb Al-Din Al-Tabari(rah) stated:

The birth of the Sahabi Hakeem ibn Hizam took place in the Ka’aba. It was not known for anyone else that he was born in the Ka’aba. [Kitab Al-Qira Li-Qasid Umm Al-Qura, pages 520-521].

Note: This apparently shows that the fable of Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba was rejected by Muhibb Al-Din Al-Tabari.

(6). Ibn Mulqan(rah) stated:

فتعقبه ابن الملقن رحمه الله فقال :

“حَكِيم بن حزام رضي الله عنه ولد فِي جَوف الْكَعْبَة ، وَلَا يعرف أحد ولد فِيهَا غَيره ، وَأما مَا رُوِيَ عَن عَلّي رَضي اللهُ عَنهُ أَنه ولد فِيهَا فضعيف ، وَخَالف الْحَاكِم فِي ذَلِكَ فَقَالَ فِي «الْمُسْتَدْرك» فِي تَرْجَمَة عَلّي أَن الْأَخْبَار تَوَاتَرَتْ بذلك” انتهى

“البدر المنير” (6/489) .

“Hakeem bin Hizam was born inside the Kaaba, and no one is known to be born there other than him, As for what is said about Ali(ra) that he was born in Ka’aba, then it is weak, and Al-Hakim went against this and said in his Mustadrak in the chapter about Ali that it is Mutawattir. [“Al-Badr Al-Muneer” (6/489)].

(7). Allamah Shams al-din Safeeri.

Allamah Shams al-din Safeeri stated: The opinion that Ali(ra) was born inside Ka’aba is weak in the sight of Scholars. (al-majalis al-wagheet fi sharh ahadeeth khair al-bariyya min Sahih Al-Imam Bukhari vol 2, page 161).

(8). Al-Shareef Hatim bin Arif Al-Awni(A faculty member at the University of Umm Al-Qura) gave a detailed answer on this matter, where he rejected the view of Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba.

وقد سئل د. الشريف حاتم بن عارف العوني (عضو هيئة التدريس بجامعة أم القرى) :
هل صحيح أن سيدنا علياً رضي الله عنه وُلِد داخل الكعبة ؟ وإذا كان الجواب نعم فهل في هذا ميزة له رضي الله عنه ؟

فأجاب :

” لم يرد حديثٌ صحيحٌ بذلك ، ولم يرد بذلك شيءٌ في المصادر الموثوقة من مصادر السنة ؛ إلا ما جاء في كلامٍ لأبي عبد الله الحاكم النيسابوري ، وما ورد في مناقب علي بن أبي طالب (رضي الله عنه) لابن المغازلي .

أما الحاكم فأورد ما جاء عن بعض نسّابي قريشٍ ، من أن حكيم بن حِزام رضي الله عنه وُلد في جوف الكعبة ، فلم يُنكر ذلك ، لكنه لما أورد قول مصعب بن عبد الله الزُّبيري عن حكيم : ” وأمه فاختة بنت زهير بن أسد بن عبد العزى ، وكانت ولدت حكيمًا في الكعبة ، وهي حامل ، فضربها المخاض وهي في جوف الكعبة ، فولدت فيها ، فحُمِلت في نِطْعٍ ، وغُسل ما كان تحتها من الثياب عند حوض زمزم .

قال مصعب : ولم يُولد قبلَه ، ولا بعده ، في الكعبة أحدٌ” .

فتعقّبه الحاكم قائلًا : ” وَهِمَ مصعبٌ في الحرف الأخير ، فقد تواترت الأخبار : أن فاطمة بنت أسد ولدت أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب كرم الله وجهه في جوف الكعبة “.

وأما ما جاء عند ابن المغازلي ، فإنه أسند خبرًا فيه قصة مولد علي (رضي الله عنه) في جوف الكعبة (مناقب علي رقم 3) ؛ لكن إسناده شديد الضعف ، لتتابع المجهولين في إسناده ، مع نكارة القصة التي تفرّدوا بها . وهذا أحد أكبر عيوب كتاب ابن المغازلي في المناقب ، حتى قال شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية عن كتابه هذا: “قد جمع في كتابه من الأحاديث الموضوعات ما لا يخفى أنه كذبٌ على من له أدنى معرفةٍ بالحديث”. كما في منهاج السنة النبوية (7/15).

فأما قول الحاكم : ” فقد تواترت الأخبار: أن فاطمة بنت أسد ولدت أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب كرم الله وجهه في جوف الكعبة “، فـ(المتواتر) عند الحاكم ليس هو المتواتر عند الأصوليين ، والذي يعنون به الخبر الذي يفيد العلم اليقيني الضروري لكثرة المخبرين به . كما نبّه على ذلك البلقيني في محاسن الاصطلاح (453) ، والعراقي في التقييد والإيضاح (1/776) .

فلا يتجاوز كلام الحاكم أن يكون إخبارًا عن أن هذا الأمر في زمنه كان من الأمور المشهورة بين الناس ، ولا يدل على أكثر من ذلك ؛ لما بيّنّاه من أن المتواتر عنده ليس هو المتواتر عند الأصوليين .

وإذا تبيّنَ ذلك : فإن مجرّد الشهرة في زمن الحاكم المتوفَّى سنة (405هـ) ، لا تُغني شيئًا ؛ خاصةً إذا خالفت مقالةً لمن هو أقرب زمنًا منه من زمن الحادثة التي اشتهرت في زمنه ، وهو مصعب الزبيري المتوفَّى سنة (236هـ) ، وهو علّامةٌ في نسب قريشٍ وأخبارها ، حيث نفى أن يكون أحدٌ قد وُلد في جوف الكعبة غير حكيم بن حزامٍ كما سبق .

أما سبب شهرة هذا الأمر في زمن الحاكم : فهو لأنه مما تدّعيه الشيعةُ لعلي رضي الله عنه ، وهو عندهم يكاد يكون من المسلّمات ، دون أن يكون لديهم برهانٌ صحيحٌ عليه . حتى قال شاعرهم (وهو السيد الحميري ، كما في ديوانه 64:) عن فاطمة بنت أسد أمِّ علي بن أبي طالب (رضي الله عنه) :

ولدتْهُ في حرم الإله وأمنـِه    والبيتِ حيثُ فناؤه والمسجدُ

بيضاءُ طاهرةُ الثيابِ كريمةٌ   طابت وطاب وليدُها والمولدُ

وتناقلت ذلك المصادرُ الشيعيةُ ، كأمالي الشيخ الصدوق وأمالي الطوسي وغيرها .

وفي الإمام الحاكم تشيّعٌ يسير ، نص عليه أهل العلم . فلعل مصدره هو شهرة هذا الخبر في زمنه بين عموم الناس ، والناس أخذوها من الشيعة ومن مثل هذه الأخبار غير المعتمدة ”

انتهى .

Sharif Hatim al-Awni was asked: Is it right that Ali (ra) was born inside the Kaabah? And if the response is in affirmative then is there any specialty in that?

He Answered: No authentic narration is present to support that and it is not mentioned in any of the reliable sources of Sunnah except what has been mentioned from Abu Abdullah al-Hakim and what is present in the Manaqib written by al-Maghazili.

As for Al-Hakim then he quoted some of the genealogist from Quraish that Hakim bin Hizam was born inside Kaaba, and he did not object to it. However, when he quoted that statement of Mus’ab bin abdullah regarding Hakeem that her mother was Fakhita b. Zuhair b. Asad b. Abdul Uzza. She gave birth to Hakeem inside Kaaba. She got labour pain while she was in Kabah and she gave birth to him inside Kaaba. She was carried on a rug and the cloth beneath her was washed at the Zamzam.

Mus’ab said: No one before him and after him was born inside the Kaabah. So al-Hakim objected by saying: Mus’ab did a mistake for it is mutawatir that Fatima bint Asad gave birth to Amir al-Mu’mineen Ali inside the Kaabah.

As for Ibn al-Maghazili then he mentioned a narration with the story of the birth of Ali inside Kaabah. (No. 3) But its isnad is severely weak because of the continuous chain of unknown narrators along with the Nakarah in the story which they are alone in narrating. This is one of the biggest problem the the Manaqib by Maghazili so much so that Ibn Taymiyyah said “He has gathered in it fabricated narration which is not hidden to anyone with slight awareness of narrations.” As in Minhaj as-Sunnah (7/15)

As for the saying of Hakim “Narrative s are Mutawatir that Fatimah bint Asad gave birth to Amir al-Mumineen Ali karramAllah wajhahu inside the Kaabah” then know that Mutawatir according to Hakim doesn’t mean Mutawatir as per the terminology of Usulis who consider that Mutawatir is that which gives certainty in absolute knowledge because of abundance of the narrators as it was pointed out by Al-Bulqini in Mahasin Istilah (p.453) and al-Iraqi in at-Taqyeed wa al-Idah (1/776)

So the statement of Hakim doesn’t indicates more than this, that it was famous among the contemporaries of Hakim. It doesn’t mean more than that as we have pointed out that Mutawatir according to Hakim doesn’t mean Mutawatir according to Usulis.

When it is clear then know that the mere fame during the time of Hakim (405 AH) doesn’t mean anything especially when it opposes the opinion of him who existed at a time closer to the incident than it. He was Mus’ab b. Abdullah (235AH) a specialist in genealogy of Quraysh. He denied that any one was born inside Kaabah except Hakeem b. Hizaam as it has passed.

As for the reason for which it became famous during the era of Hakim then it is due to what shia claim for Ali and it is is agreed upon among them without having any reliable evidence. A poet said…. Then he mentioned a poem of Himyari…

The shia sources like Amaali of Sadooq and Amaali of Tusi are keeping it alive in their books. It could be that the source of this story is the fame of the incident among common public and people took it from shia.

-End quote-{Source}.

(9). Famous Sufi Shaykh GF Haddad.

Sufi Shaykh GF Haddad stated:

It is not authentically reported that Sayyiduna `Ali – Allah ennoble his face – was born in the Ka`ba.

However, it is firmly established that the Companion Hakim ibn Hizam ibn Khuwaylid ibn `Abd al-`Uzza ibn Qusay al-Qurashi was born in the Ka`ba, as Imam Muslim stated in his Sahih (Kitab al-Buyu`, Bab al-Sidq fi al-Bay` wa al-Bayan). See also al-Hakim, Mustadrak (1990 ed. 3:549) and Ibn Hajar, al-Isaba (#1802). [Source] . {Screen Shot}.

(10). Moulvi Ishaq- The Controversial Sunni Scholar who is hailed by the Shi’ees.

Moulvi Ishaq denied the birth of Ali(ra) inside Ka’aba and considered it baseless. [Source].

 

(VII) – As per the other view Ali(ra) was born in Shu’ab bani hashim.

As per the other view regarding the birthplace of Ali(ra) then we find that, Ali(ra) was born in Makkah in Shu’ab/Sha’ib Bani Hashim.

(i). Khalifa bin Khayyat stated:

خلیفہ بن خیاط المتوفی ۲۴۰ ھ ل۔

قال خليفة: وحدثني يحيى بن محمد عن عبد العزيز بن عمران عن محمد بن عبد الله بن المؤمل المخزومي قال ولد علی بمکة فی شعب بنی ہاشم۔ ﴿تاریخ خلیفہ بن خیاط ص١۹۹

Khalifa says: and yahya bin mohammad said from abdulaziz bin imran from mohammad bin abdullah bin almu’amil al makhzumi that Ali was born in Makkah in Shu’ab bani hashim. ( Tareekh Khalifa bin Khayyat, page 199) [The same was mentioned by Ibn Asakir in Tareekh Dimashq Kabeer vol 45, page 448].

(ii). Mohi-aldeen Ahmad Imam stated: The house in which Ali(ra) was born, it was in Shu’ab Bani Hashim.[Fi Rijaab al bayt al-Ateeq vol 1, page 79]

 

(VIII) – Who was actually born in the Ka’aba?

6041 سمعت أبا الفضل الحسن بن يعقوب يقول سمعت أبا أحمد محمد بن عبد الوهاب يقول سمعت علي بن غنام العامري يقول ولد حكيم بن حزام في جوف الكعبة دخلت أمه الكعبة فمخضت فيها فولدت في البيت».
6044 أخبرنا أبو بكر محمد بن أحمد بن بالويه ثنا إبراهيم بن إسحاق الحربي ثنا مصعب بن عبد الله فذكر ثم نسب حكيم بن حزام وزاد فيه وأمه فاختة بنت زهير بن أسد بن عبد العزى وكانت ولدت حكيما في الكعبة وهي حامل فضربها المخاض وهي في جوف الكعبة» (3/549-550

We read in Mustadrak Al-Hakim, that there were two historians from the second century who held the view that Hakeem bin Hizam was born inside Ka’bah, the first is Mus’ab Al-Zubairi, and the second is Ali bin Aththam, both of whom lived in the second century after Hijra. [Refer Mustadrak Al-Hakim]

However, the correct view is that, there is no definitive proof to support this view, for claims come from people that have lived in late times.

 

(IX) – Other Myths related to the Fictitious Fable of Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba.

(I). Myth #1: Crack in the Wall of Ka’aba is a proof of Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba.

There is a myth which is wide spread among Shias that, the crack in the wall of Ka’aba is proof for Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba, they claim that the crack occurred when the wall of Ka’aba opened miraculously for the mother of Ali(ra) – Fatima bint Asad- so that she could enter it for giving birth to Ali(ra). Therefore, let us dissect this Shia myth and expose its reality.

(a). The FABRICATED Shia narration(as per Shia standards) which mentions the opening of the wall of Ka’aba for the mother of Ali(ra), states that after the mother of Ali(ra) entered Ka’aba, the wall came back to ITS FORMER STATE. We read: Yazid ibn Qa`nab says: I saw the wall of Ka`bah was opened and Fatimah went inside it and the wall returned to its former state. (Basha’ir al-Mustafa, page 8).

So in its former state, either the wall of Ka’aba had a crack on it or there was no crack on it. If there was a crack on the wall of Ka’aba in its former state, that is before opening, then how can it be considered a sign or proof for the supposed birth of Ali(ra)? And if there was no crack on the wall of Ka’aba in its former state, that is before opening, then it wouldn’t have been said that, it just returned back to its former state, without the mentioning of the crack. Interestingly, the narrator of this fictitious incident NEVER claimed that he or the people around him saw any crack on the wall after the Mother of Ali(ra) went through it. This is a strong proof that, the cracks we see on Walls of Ka’aba occurred recently, and have no relevance to the fabricated Shia report about the opening of Wall. Ironically, the Shia propagandists make such hypothetical conclusions using this fabricated report, which the narrator himself never made.

(b). The Ka’aba has suffered from floods, sieges, and various natural disasters. It has been repaired or rebuilt several times in history. It has been historically proven that the Ka’aba has been rebuilt numerous times throughout history. Therefore, even if supposedly for argument’s sake, there was a crack on the Ka’aba due on the birth of Ali(ra), then it would have long been gone and lost from the first time the Ka’aba’s structure was destroyed and rebuilt. And if supposedly the crack kept appearing each time it was rebuilt, then surely such an unusual event would have been mentioned by many historians or scholars, be it Sunni or Shia.

(c). Explanation for the present cracks in Ka’aba is that; Cracks in a very old wall/rocks is bound to occur; it is the principle of erosion.

(d). No Historian be it Sunni or Shia, ever mentioned about the presence of cracks in Ka’aba which (supposedly) kept appearing each time it was rebuilt, this is a strong proof that the present cracks in the wall of Ka’aba occurred recently. And the Shia propagandists took-over this natural incident to support their baseless myth.

 

(II). Myth #2: Every year on 13th of Rajab the Crack in the Ka’aba re-opens.

Some Shias believe that, on 13th of the month of Rajab – The birthday of Ali(ra) – the crack on the Wall of Ka’aba re-opens. These people even make false propaganda that, the Wahabis/Saudis, try to cover this crack to hide the miracle of Ali’s birth inside Ka’aba and even after all their efforts the crack in the wall of Ka’aba re-opens.

We say, it is quite possible for Sunnis/Wahabis to believe the birth miracle without believing the political attachments to it in the current day. But that needs to be proven from reliable sources or reliable Hadeeth. Unbiased Sunnis will not accept the politicization towards cover-up or whatever because there is no reason for Sunnis/Wahabis to cover up a miracle of any of the Salaf. Sunnis/Wahabis believe that Ali(ra) was a great Sahabi, he was the greatest sahabi after Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them all). Sunnis/Wahabis are proud of them all and speak of all miracles in full faith – as long as the stories are cogent and authentic.

The simple response, as to why the Saudi government tries to fix a crack in the Wall of Ka’aba is that, fixing a crack in a wall is done to stop the problem escalating. It is not necessarily done to hide a miracle. If the Wall of our house has a crack, they try to fill it, because they don’t want the crack to get worse. The same is done with Historical Monuments in several parts of the world. Why can’t this be the reason that the Saudis are filling in the crack? Why does it have to be because they are trying to “hide a baseless miracle”?

We say, If for argument’s sake this crack really occurred during birth of Ali(ra) then it needed to be done only once, there is no need for it to be repeated. We never heard of any other miracle repeating. Importantly, No such thing happens for proving to non-Muslims who is right or wrong so why should something happen to prove to sub-groups of Muslims that someone is right or wrong?

Moreover, we would like to ask the Shias, is there any historical evidence documented from the first time Ka’aba was rebuilt, all the way until Al-Saud came to power that the crack reappeared and was hidden throughout history? How the crack when reappeared was not noticed or became apparent by the millions of Muslims throughout history? Did the classical Shia Scholars and Historians throughout History failed to document this supposed miracle?.

Lastly, as for the false claim that, every year the crack reopens – to prove this the Shias need to provide us a picture of the closed crack and then the re-opened crack- that is two pictures , one regarding when it reopens and other when it is fixed. If they cannot provide us these pictures ranging over 10 years then we cannot believe this claim. More importantly we need a picture on the day of the birthday of Imam Ali(ra) or a video of the crack forming on his birthday to believe this claim. Until then, this will be counted as one of the countless myths the Shiites believe in.

An Example of Well-Know Myth(About the Green Dome).

To make the unbiased and truth-seeking readers understand, how easily myths among the ignorant Muslims gain acceptance, we would like present the example of the Green Dome(Gumbad-e-Khizra) over grave of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS), it is believed by some of the Muslims of Sub-continent that there is no shadow of the Green Dome. And it is very hard to make these people understand that this belief is incorrect, because the fact is that, there is a shadow of this Dome, which can be seen in this video. [Video Source] ; Even after such a clear-cut proof, we will still find people creating doubts over the video or making feeble attempts to discard the video.

Due to blind faith and lack of objectivity people ended up accepting such myths whole heartedly, just because these are linked with holy men such as Prophets or Saints. And when someone attempts to correct their belief, these misled people develop grudge against that person and start viewing such person as the enemy of the holy person with whom that myth is related. The same goes for the myth of crack in the wall of Ka’aba, even this myth is irrational and baseless, but still Shiites believe in it whole heartedly, and when anyone attempts to rectify their mistake, they accuse such a person of Nasibism.

 

(X) – Answers to common references cited by Shiites.

(i). Imam Dhahabi mentioned the statement of Al-Hakim in his book without any criticism, so it means he accepted the view of Al-Hakim. [Refer Talkees Mustadarak, Dhahabi, vol 4, page 197]

Answer:

Talkhis al-Mustadrak’ is an abridged version of Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain written by Imam Al-Dhahabi. The word “Talkhis” itself means abridgement. The grading of Al-Dhababi in Talkhis is not his own grading, but rather it’s the summarized grading of al-Hakim, as apparent from the title of the book itself. For more details refer this [Screen Shot].

On the contrary we find that Al-Dhahabi narrated that, Hakeem was born in Ka’aba in his book Siyar Alam al-Nubala. However, he didn’t mention in this book about the birth of Ali(ra) inside Ka’aba, which proves that he disagreed with the baseless claim of Al-Hakim like other scholars.

ورواه الذهبي عن ابن منده وأتى برواية الزبير عن مصعب بن عثمان أن حكيم ولد في جوف الكعبة (سير أعلام النبلاء3/46

 

(ii). Masoodi writes in his book

علي بن الحسين مسعودي: وكان مولده في الكَعبة

Ali(ra) was born inside kaaba. [Murooj ud dhahab; by Masoodi, vol 2, page 311]

Similarly we read in Shia website:

Masoodi the famous historian writes in his book of history Muruj el Zahab, that ‘Ali was born inside the Kaaba on the orders of Muhammad the Messenger of God.

Answer:

Al-Mas’udi was a fourth century Shi’ee, who has a book attributed to him with evidence for the twelve Imams.

Ibn Arabi Andalusi said about Masoodi:

As for the cunning innovator, that was al-Mas`udi. He brought something close to atheism in what he related. As for his innovation, there is no doubt about it. [Al Awasim min al-Qawasim, page 161].

Shia Allama al-Hilli in his “Khulasat” p 186 said about Mas’udi:

علي بن الحسين بن علي المسعودي أبو الحسن الهذلي له كتب في الإمامة وغيرها منها كتاب في إثبات الوصية لعلي بن أبي طالب (ع) وهو صاحب كتاب مروج الذهب
“Ali ibn Hussain ibn Ali al-Mas’udi Abul Hasan al-Khuzali. He has a book about imamate and others, from them book in the proof of wasiyat to Ali ibn Abi Talib(a) and he’s author of book “Muruj az-zahab”.

Almost the same info was given by Shia scholar Ibn Dawud al-Hilli in his “Rijal” p 137:

علي بن الحسين بن علي : المسعودي أبو الحسن لم له كتاب ” إثبات الوصية لعلي ع وهو صاحب ” مروج الذهب

Other shia scholar Sa’eed Bahrul Ulum in his “Fawaid ar-rijaliya” (4/150) said:

ومنهم الشيخ الفاضل الشيعي على بن الحسين ابن علي المسعودي مصنف كتاب مروج الذهب

“and from them alFazil shia Ali ibn al-Hussain ibn Ali al-Mas’udi, author of the book “Muruj az-zahab”.

Shia scholar Shahrode in “Mustadrakat ilmul rijal al-hadith” (5/352) said:

9929 – علي بن الحسين بن علي المسعودي أبو الحسن الهذلي : من أجلاء علمائنا الإمامية صاحب كتاب مروج الذهب ورسالة إثبات الوصية لعلي بن أبي طالب ع وغيرهما

Ali ibn al-Hussain al-Mas’udi Abul Hasan al-Huzale: from our Imami Scholars, author of book “Muruj az-zahab” and risalat “Ithbat al-wasiya li Ali ibn Abu Talib(alaihi salam) and others.

Therefore, not only is the opinion of Al-Mas’udi rejected because it is the opinion of a Twelver Shia, but also because he is a late scholar. We even argue that this quote is no sufficient evidence, for Al-Mas’udi is a fourth century Shi’ee scholar whose opinion does not hold any weight in their school due to the lack of statements that establish his credibility.

 

(iii). Ibn Sabagh maliki writes in his book

ابن صباغ المالكي: ولد علي ( عليه السلام ) بمكة المشرفة بداخل البيت الحرام في يوم الجمعة الثالث عشر من شهر الله الأصم رجب الفرد سنة ثلاثين من عام الفيل قبل الهجرة بثلاث وعشرين سنة ، وقيل بخمس وعشرين ، وقبل المبعث باثني عشرة سنة ، وقيل بعشر سنين . ولم يولد في البيت الحرام قبله أحد سواه ، وهي فضيلة خصه الله تعالى بها إجلالا له وإعلاء لمرتبته وإظهارا لتكرمته .

Ali was born in month of Rajab 13, in city of Mecca, inside ka’aba; apart from him, no one else was born there and this is your glory. [ Al-Fusool Al-Muhima, by Ibn sabagh maliki, page 29]

Answer:

Nur Al-Din Ali Ibn Muhammad Ibn Al-Sabagh. Author of “Al-Fusool Al-Muhima”. His book is included in “Al-Dhareea” [16/246]. Tehrani said: “In the treatise “Shia Shiekhs” he is considered one of them, even though he is one of the great Malikis, this is why in “Kashf Al-Dhunoon” he said: “Some of them attributed the author to Rafidism for what he mentioned in his introduction / khutba.”

Therefore, Ibn Sabagh Al-Maliki, is an infamous 9th century Shi’ee, who has a book proving the Imamate of the twelve Imams.

Hence, not only is his opinion rejected because it is the opinion of a Twelver Shia, but also because he is a very late scholar.

 

(iv). Kanji Shafai has accepted this in his book as well.

گنجي شافعي: «ولد أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب بمكة في بيت الله الحرام ليلة الجمعة لثلاث عشرة ليلة خلت من رجب سنة ثلاثين من عام الفيل ولم يولد قبله ولا بعده مولود في بيت الله الحرام سواه إكراما له بذلك ، وإجلالا لمحله في التعظيم .

[kifaya tul talib; by Kanji shafai; page 407]

Answer:

Al-Kanji Al-Shafii: The editor of his book: “ Al-Bayan fee Akhbar Sahib Al-Zaman”, who is also a Shiite, said: “ I have not come across a complete biography of Hafidh Al-Kanji Al-Shafi, for he has been ignored by many of his contemporary historians such as Ibn Khilikan in (Wafiyat Al-Ayan) , Abu Shama in (Al-Dhayl ala Al-Rawdatayn) , Al-Yunini in (Mira’at Al-Zaman) , Al-Dhahabi in (Tathkirat Al-Hufadh).”He also said: “ Historians mentioned that Hafidh Al-Kanji was killed in the year 658 , in the Ummayad Jami in Damascus , on the hands of the public who were antagonized by his reclining to Shia. Some others have added another reason for his murder, being that he used to deal with the Tatar and accepted a position that they gave to him as well as the money (molested) from those who were absent from his country.”

Imam Ibn Katheer, in Al-Bidaya wal Nihaya, clearly identifies him as a Rafidi: “ In the middle of the Jami, the public killed a Rafidi Shiekh who was helping Tatar over the money of people called Al-Fakhr Muhammad Ibn Yusuf Ibn Muhammad Al-Kanji. He had evil intentions , and was from the East , helping them over the money of Muslims. May Allah disparage him. And they killed a group of hypocrites of his likes, so an end was put to those who transgressed. Al-Hamdullilah”

Therefore, not only is this opinion rejected because it is the opinion of a Shia, and he is a very late scholar but also because he most probably based his view in the fabricated report in Shia books, which has been discussed in the article.

 

(v). Mullah Ali Qari writes in his book “Sharh-ush-Shifa.

It is written in Mustadrak Imam hakim that Ali(ra) was born in ka’aba. [Sharh-ush-Shifa]

Answer:

Here is the full quote fromm Sharh Al-Shifa:

(وحكيم بن حزام) بكسر الحاء وبالزاء ولد في الكعبة قبل عام الفيل بثلاث عشرة سنة ولا يعرف أحد ولد في الكعبة غيره على الأشهر وفي مستدرك الحاكم أن علي بن أبي طالب كرم الله وجهه ولد أيضا في داخل الكعبة

Even though Mulla Ali Qari in Sharh Al-Shifa  copied the statement of Al-Hakim, but he clarified there that Hakim bin Hazam is the one who was born in Ka’aba, and nobody knows anyone else being born in Ka’aba, as per famous opinion. (Sharh Al-Shifa, vol 1, page 159).

 

(vi). Hasan bin Momin Shablanji writes:

Ali is cousin of Holy Prophet(saws), and he is unleashed sword; he was born in the year 30 of aam al-feel, on Friday; 13th Rajab; inside ka’aba, and none was born there before you. [noor ul absar, shablanji, page 183]

Answer:

Shablanji is a twelfth Century Sufi. Therefore his opinion is rejected because he is a very late Sufi Sheikh. More can be read about him here:

الشبلنجي النكرة الذي يستدل به الشيعة

 

(vii). Mulla Jami said “Ali(ra) was born in Mecca, and according to some, he was born in ka’aba”. [shawahid un nabuwa, jami, page 280]

Answer:

Mullah Jami said Ali(ra) was born in Makkah, which is agreed upon view and then he shared the odd and incorrect view of some people, most probably Al-Hakim, historian Mas’udi, etc, whose quotes have been responded above.

 

(viii). Sibt Ibn Jawzi writes in his book:-

سبط ابن جوزي: وروي أن فاطمة بنت أسد كانت تطوف بالبيت وهي حامل بعلي (ع) فضربها الطلق ففتح لها باب الكعبة فدخلت فوضتعه فيها .
It is narrated that Fatima bint Asad was doing tawaf of ka’aba when Ali was in her womb; she got labour pains; so the wall opened up, and she entered; and Ali was born there. [tazkira tul khawas; sibt ibn jawzi; page 30]

Answer:

This Sibt ibn Al-Jawzi was an unreliable Rafidhi according to Imam Dhahabi.

We read :

9880 – يوسف بن قزغلى الواعظ المؤرخ شمس الدين، أبو المظفر، سبط ابن الجوزي . روى عن جده وطائفة، وألف كتاب مرآة الزمان، فتراه يأتي فيه بمناكير الحكايات، وما أظنه بثقة فيما ينقله، بل يجنف ويجازف، ثم إنه ترفض . وله مؤلف في ذلك . نسأل الله العافية مات سنة أربع وخمسين وستمائة بدمشق . قال الشيخ محيي الدين السوسي : لما بلغ جدي موت سبط ابن الجوزي قال : لا رحمه الله ، كان رافضيا

9880- Yusuf ibn Qazghali al-Wa’ith the historian Shams al-Deen, abu al-Muzaffar Sibt ibn al-Jawzi. narrated from his grandfather and others, authored the book Miraat al-Zaman and in it he has gathered corrupt stories, I do not think he is reliable in what he reports but he exaggerates, then he became a Rafidhi. He has a book about this. We ask Allah for protection, he died 654 in Damascus. al-Sheikh Muhyi al-Deen al-Susi said: When my grand-father learned of the death of Sibt ibn al-Jawz he said: May Allah not show him any mercy he was a Rafidhi.[ Meezan al-‘E’itidal by al-Imam al-Dhahabi vol.4 pg.471]

Therefore, not only is this opinion rejected because it is the opinion of an unreliable Rafidi, and he is a very late scholar but also because he most probably based his view in the fabricated report in Shia books, which has been discussed in the article.

Conclusion:

The conclusion is that all the references which are often cited by Shiites are either the erroneous and baseless opinions of negligent scholars such as Al-Hakim, or those scholars who just copied the statement of Al-Hakim or this opinion was shared by Scholars in passive form which means it is odd one that has no authenticity.

Some Scholars copied the view of those scholars who were leaning towards Tashayyu(shiism), who without proper investigation or scrutinization mentioned these views in their books, like Imam Hakim; So the later scholars like Imam Dhahabi, Mulla Ali Qari, Shah Wali Ullah, Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan Bhopali etc , presented the view of Al-Hakim in their books, therefore all these are secondary sources which copied and relied on the baseless view of Al-Hakim, their primary source was Al-Hakim’s claim, so the ruling on them would be the same as that on the claim of Al-Hakim and those are to be discarded.  It is worthy to note, that usually the Shia propagandists present a long list of Sunni scholars who mentioned in their books about Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba, however this is a deceitful trick to fool the readers, because all these are secondary sources which copied and relied on the statement of Al-Hakim, and their primary source being the statement of Al-Hakim. Also, Some other Scholars merely presented the views about Ali’s(ra) birth mentioned in Shia books like Al-Fusool al-Muhimmah and Murooj al-Dhahab.

 

(XI) – The anticipated accusation of Nasibism for shattering the Fictitious Fable about Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba.

We anticipate that after reading this article, which exposes and shatters the oft-repeated fictitious fable about Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba, the Ghulat amongst the Shiites, will accuse us of Nasibism, because in the view of Ghulat(exaggerators) “moderate” love for Ali(ra) is also Nasibism, even though Ahlus-sunnah(people upon Sunnah) firmly believe in several merits and virtues of Ali(ra) which were reported authentically. Infact, We believe Ali(ra) was the fourth best person in the whole Ummah(nation) of Prophet Mohammad(SAWS), however as per the logic of Ghulat Shia, if someone says apple is the fourth best fruit in the world, then according to the logic of Ghulat(exaggerators) such a person hates apple. Hence, we are bound to be declared as Nasibis, by people with such sick mentality, even though we love and honour Ali(ra) in the correct way as he should be loved and respected. We believe that Imam Ali was a great Sahabi, he was the greatest Sahabi after Imam Abu bakr, Imam Umar, and Imam Uthman (may Allah be pleased with them all).

As for rejecting the fictitious story of Ali’s(ra) birth inside Ka’aba, then we believe that, the honourable status of Ali(ra) is not dependent on these fabricated and baseless stories. Secondly, righteousness and honourable status is not based on where one was born. In the view of Sunnis, the status of Ali(ra) is very high and it will be the same, regardless of the place of his birth.

Therefore, we advice the Ghulat Shia to have some shame and to avoid making a mockery of themselves by accusing us of Nasibism. But if still they want to ignore our advice and accuse us of Nasibism then we challenge them to provide any reliable report with a reliable CHAIN(isnad) from their own Shia books, which proves that Ali(ra) was born inside Ka’aba. If they can’t provide any such narration from their own books, then Insha Allah, the readers are wise enough to judge who are upon truth(haq) and who are upon falsehood(batil).

In reality the fable of birth inside Ka’aba in Pre-islamic era doesn’t adds any virtue to anyone, however the fabrications of Shiites in their books infact degrades and dishonors Maryam(as) and Isa(as) and even Ali(ra). So if anyone is to be blamed for Nasibism then it should be those Ghulaat who fabricated this story.

 

P.S: Some contents taken from twelvershia.net.

“Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish.” Quran (17:81).

May Allah’s (swt) blessings be upon His Messenger, his household, and companions.

2 thoughts on “The Fable of Ali’s(RA) Birth inside Ka’aba: An Honour or Dishonour?

  1. I WONDER THERE CAN BE SUCH WALIDUZZINAH HATERS OF THE WASI E RASOOL ALLAH BILA FASL THAT THEY FAIL TO DIGEST THE FACT THAT HAZRAT ALI IBNE ABITALIB(a s ) HAD TO BE BORN IN THE HOLIEST OF THE HOLY PLACE OF EARTH . THERE ARE TWO REASONS.ONE THE FOUR FIVE HEROES THEY REVERE & PLACE THEM AT THE HIGHEST PADESTLE, THIER
    ATTRIBUTES , MOST OF THEM PROVED FALSE & FABRICATED. THE MAN SIDDIQUE WAS TO BE FOUND MOST KAZZAB EVEN IN THE MASJID E NABVI, THE FAROOQ WAS FOUND TO BE VERBALLY ABUSING, CALLING THE NABI (s)(ma’azallah) A PAGAL & THEN THE CRIMINAL KILLED HIS GRADSON IN HIS MOTHERS WOMB & HIS DAUGHTER TOO BY PUTTING HER HOUSE ON FIRE…
    THEN THEIR THIRD HERO IS BRANDED FROM THEIR OWN MOTHER OF BELIEVERS AS KAFFIR , NATHAL AND WAJIBUL QATL..THE FOURTH SO CALLED KATIB E QORA’AN PUTS THE QORA’AN ON SPEARS WHILE WAGING A WAR ON KHALIFAE WAQT THAT TOO NOW UNDISPUTED . & THE FIFTH FASIQ O FAJIR TERRORIST BAD CHARACTER TRIED TO WIPE OUT THE ENTIRE FAMILY OF THE PROPHET OF ISLAM .ALLAH’S LA’AN ON THOSE WHO WRITE
    RAZI ALLAH ANHO AFTER THEIR NAME . VERILY ALLAH CAN NEVER BE RAZI WITH ANY OF THEM . IN SUCH A SITUATION WHAT THESE DEVIANT,MISGUIDED PEOPLE WHO DO CONSIDER THEM THEIR FOUNDER WITH THE WORST TRAITS OF THE WORLD DO ? .

    THEIR MOTHER OF BELIEVERS TESTIFIES ”ANZARO WAJHE ALIYAN IBASDAH” ALSO SAYS ”THERE WAS NONE BETTER THAN HIM ” AT THE SAME TIME INSTEAD OF KEEPING CONFINED TO THE HOME AS WARNED STERNLY BY HER DEPARTING HUSBAND , CAME OUT SHOUTING AND ASKING TO SHOWER ARROW ON THE TABOOT OF THE PROPHET’S GRANDSON WHOM THE HOLY PROPHT USED TO SAY , MY SON HASAN AND HUSAIN ARE THE LEADERS OF SHABAB E AHLE JANNAH . IT IS ALSO IN REPORT & SHEIKH YASIR HABIB HAS VERY ABLY ARGUED WHO IN FACT KILLED THE PROPHET OF ISLAM (saws)

    SO THE SENSE OF DISPAIR , DEFEAT AND SHAME BRING SUCH UTTERANCES
    WHICH HAVE THEIR OWN MOHADISSEN IN REFERENCES.DO YOU EULOGIZER
    OF THESE MUNAFEQQEN CLAIM EACH & EVERY AHLE SUNNAH WAL JAMA’A IS A KAZZAB LIKE THEIR FIRST CALIF ,WHO ACQUIRED THE POSITION BY USURPING AND INDULGING IN REBELLIAN AFTER THEY HAD ALREADY PUT THEIR ALLEGIANCE AT THE GHADEER E KHUM ON 18TH OF ZILHIJJAH.

    THIS IS A WARNING FOR YOU , BETTER HAVE GOOD SENSE, STUDY YOUR OWN BOOKS, RESEARCH THE EVENTS OF ISLAM AND FIND OUT THE REASONS WHY SUCH PEOPLE FROM SUCH IMMINENT CLERICAL& RELIGIO BACKGROUND LIKE DR TEJANI SAMAVI, SHEIKH JEHAD ISMAEIL, SHEIKH KAMBOH AND MILLIONS OTHERS LEFT THE WIERD FAITH AND CAME TO SIRAT E MUSTAQEEM BEHIND AHLE BAYT E RASOOL (saawaws)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s